Andrew Hastie
Canning · Liberal Party · Australia
“My question is to the Minister for Housing. I refer to the minister's previous answer. When did the minister first become aware that the government's changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing imposed a new death tax on widows, divorcees and victims of domestic violence?”
“In many cases, these tariffs apply to goods that already enter Australia duty-free under free trade agreements or other concession arrangements.”
“It is a practical contribution to Ukraine's economic resilience, which is so important to their overall war effort, and it is also a symbolic demonstration that Australia continues to stand with Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. The measure is appropriately targeted.”
“The first is the removal of a further 497 so-called nuisance tariffs from 1 July 2026. This follows the first tranche of nuisance tariff removals in 2024, when 457 tariffs were abolished by having their existing rate of duty reset to 'free'.”
“This the bill is intended to produce compliance savings for business and administrative efficiencies for government, and that is welcome, but there remains limited public detail about the overall revenue impact, the sectors most exposed to the changes, and the expected value of the compliance savings for importers and Customs brokers.”
“Before the last election, the Prime Minister ruled out changes to taxes not once, not twice, not three times. In his own words, he ruled out tax changes 50 times. The Prime Minister was clear as day—no new taxes. People took him at his word because, apparently, his word is his bond.”
The complete record
Every one of 231 lines we hold for Andrew Hastie, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 5.
“It can capture inadvertent or low-level conduct, and it may affect small businesses or individuals who are not deliberately acting unlawfully but are caught up in the crime itself unwittingly. So this raises legitimate questions about proportionality and fairness. The second concern is that there is a lack of a clear trigger for the bill itself. Another issue is the absence of any obvious trigger for this legislation. To the best of the coalition's knowledge and understanding, there has been no major public incident. There's been no clear enforcement failure identified on the public record, and there's no new data or report that explains why this reform is being brought forward now.”
“This bill seeks to address that gap, enabling the Australian Border Force, the ABF, to issue infringements as a faster and more flexible enforcement tool. The coalition does have key concerns with the bill. Our concerns are legitimate because, while this proposal is not unreasonable, we think the bill should be examined further. The first concern is the use of a strict liability offence. The bill relies on a strict liability offence, and that means there is no need to prove intent or knowledge; only that the goods were imported and bore a false trademark. That's a significant step in our laws. Strict liability can be appropriate in some regulatory settings, but it also carries risks.”
“For these reasons, we won't oppose this bill, but we will ensure it is better examined by referring it to a Senate inquiry. What does this bill do? In short, the bill is designed to strengthen Australia's response to the importation of counterfeit goods. The bill introduces a new strict liability offence, ensuring importers face possible financial penalties in addition to the seizure of their goods. It also brings that offence within the Customs Infringement Notice Scheme. At the moment, the primary enforcement for counterfeit imports is the seizure or forfeit of goods, and there is limited ability to impose penalties on importers. It means that many importers face no real consequence beyond losing goods. Some treat it as simply the cost of doing business.”
“Today I rise to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (False Trade Marks Infringement Notices) Bill 2026. Up front, the coalition position is this: the coalition recognises that counterfeit imports are a serious and growing problem frequently linked to organised crime. They undermine legitimate Aussie businesses, distort markets and can expose consumers to unsafe or substandard products. That's why the government's proposal to strengthen enforcement in this area is not unreasonable. Those importing counterfeit goods should be held to account, not just get a slap on the wrist. Giving the Australian Border Force additional enforcement tools has some logic to it. However, there are important questions around how this should be achieved which the government has not yet answered.”
“The New Zealand government is being transparent. It's updating its people on fuel supplies inside their country, on fuel inside the economic exclusion zone and on fuel shipments on the way from Asia. Where's that level of detail from this prime minister? What is the plan for next week and beyond? What's the plan for when the pressure really builds on the Australian people? When will you be transparent about the state of our fuel supplies? In a crisis, Australians expect strength, leadership and clarity. Right now, on all measures, the Prime Minister is failing to lead and failing to be transparent with the Australian people.”
“When Australians needed help at the fuel bowser, the coalition led and the Prime Minister followed. Australian families, tradies and small businesses will now pay less for fuel because the coalition acted first. But, without offsets in the budget, Labor's spending will drive inflation higher and will cut into people's purchasing power even further. But the issue here is that fuel security is vital to our economy and the ADF. That's why fuel security is national security, and that's why the Prime Minister needs to start leading. But we have no transparency from this government. We don't know how many ships are coming to Australia, we don't know where there are shortages in our supply and we don't know what the plan is to refuel our service stations. Across the Tasman, the New Zealand government is leading.”
“In a just-in-time diesel economy like ours, all those costs are being passed on to working Australians who've had their purchasing power taken away from them over the last four years under this Labor government. People want leadership. They want a plan. Our question to the Albanese government today is: Prime Minister, where is your plan? Why haven't you called a National Cabinet meeting for today, working with the state premiers to ensure that our service stations are ready to deliver fuel to the Australian people who need it? The truth is you don't have a plan. You've been caught asleep at the wheel, and now world events are going to make a lot of working Australians pay through their hip pocket.”
“In a crisis, people look for leadership and they want to know that there is someone in command of the situation. By the energy minister's own admission, we are in the midst of a national fuel crisis. Under the leadership of the Albanese government, we start this crisis in one of the worst economic positions we can be in. Inflation is up, at 3.8 per cent. Interest rates are up, rents are up, power prices are up, health premiums are up and now Australians are facing more pressure because fuel prices are up. They're also facing fuel shortages. There are 500 service stations across this country without fuel. Diesel is $3 per litre and petrol is over $2.50 per litre.”
“My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. When was the minister advised that six shipments of vital fuel supply bound for Australia were cancelled? How many ships have been cancelled to date?”
“He knew there was a military build-up in the Middle East. He knew there were rumblings of war. And now, after three weeks, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed and 20 per cent of the world's oil and gas is no longer on the global market. When we asked the Minister for Defence Industry two weeks ago about military operations in the Strait of Hormuz, he couldn't give an answer. But, more importantly, he revealed he hadn't even thought about the question. The truth is that there was no plan for an extended closure of the Strait of Hormuz from the Albanese government, and Australians are now suffering as a result. Fuel prices are up, farmers are panicked about their crops and we are going to be waiting a very long time at the end of a very long global supply chain. It's not good enough, Prime Minister. Do better for the Australian people.”
“Australia is facing a massive fuel crisis, and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy acknowledged that two weeks ago in this House. Families, businesses and industry are feeling the pressure around the country as fuel prices spike and fuel shortages emerge. People want to know what the Albanese government's plan is. You don't have to be an expert to see how dependent Australia is on global events. Most people know that we are trade exposed and vulnerable to supply chain disruption. That's why people are shocked to know that the Albanese government had no plan to deal with an oil supply shock in the Middle East. The Prime Minister should have known better. He, after all, gets briefed by his defence chiefs and his intelligence chiefs. He's even got President Trump's mobile phone number.”
“My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. The Strait of Hormuz has been closed to shipping since the start of the war in the Middle East. Given that 20 per cent of the world's oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz, alongside LNG and alumina, can the minister advise how long he expects military efforts will take until this critical choke point is reopened?”
“I think that's crushing news for Australian families who are barely keeping their heads above water. Why is this happening? Why can't the average person who works hard get ahead, buy a home and build a better life? Here's the bottom line: after four years of Labor, the government is growing faster than the private sector, but it's small business and not bureaucrats who build wealth and create jobs. After four years of Labor, 1.9 million people have been added to our population, and that's pressure on housing and services, driving inflation. After four years of Labor we are less productive and less competitive as a nation, and that's why the Australian people are now poorer.”
“People are now poorer after four years of Labor. Life is harder, families are stressed and hard work doesn't seem to pay off any more. People don't feel like they can get ahead because the Aussie dream is dying under Labor. The truth is that our standard of living has dropped 10 per cent under this Labor government. Labor's home-grown inflation is dissolving the purchasing power of working Australians. Australians can buy less with every single dollar they earn. Fuel prices are up, electricity prices are up, gas prices are up, food prices are up, health premiums are up, mortgages are up and rents are up. And we know that real wages for working Australians are now 2.1 per cent lower than four years ago, and the Reserve Bank forecasts that it's going to get worse.”
“Now we're discovering, in fact, that this same association is celebrating Ali Khamenei—not his death but the person and the regime and what he stood for. What he stood for is militant political Islam. That is what ISIS stands for, and that's why we are standing in here for the Australian people. We're closing the door on ISIS sympathisers, and we're calling on the Albanese government: do your duty and do the same.”
“But what we're learning is that the Albanese government is passive in the face of events. It's passive when it comes to national security problems, it's passive when empowered to make decisions to protect the Australian people and it's passive in the face of ISIS sympathisers. We're also seeing passivity elsewhere. Of course, we celebrated the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over the weekend—a very evil person who has persecuted many, many people indeed. We were very troubled to discover in question time that last year $670,000 was committed to the TAHA Association in the member for Bruce's electorate. There was no press release. It was very hush-hush and very quiet. I'm not sure there was a lot of social media done about that one.”
“Labor have tried furiously to cover up and hide their tracks, but they're weaving their own web of lies. The first lie is the claim by the Prime Minister and the home affairs minister that Labor is forbidden under the law from preventing the return of ISIS sympathisers. But the truth is the minister, under a temporary exclusion order, can prevent the return of those people. It prevents a person over 14 from entering Australia for a specified period, which may be up to two years without security advice. That's lie No. 1. We issued eight temporary exclusion orders between 2019 and 2022. That's a pretty good record compared to the one on the other side. The minister can do it. It's within his grasp and it's within his power as the minister. We just need to see his will to act.”
“Point 2 is: … the Department of Home Affairs participated at senior levels in two meetings between … the minister— and Save the Children. Point 3 is: … reluctant or not, department officials are following the government's lead to deny the federal government's active engagement in repatriating the jihadis and their children. Point 4 is: … ministers and officials are failing in their obligation 'that there be the freest flow of information between the public sector and the parliament'. Finally, point 5 is: … this is another example of the Albanese government abusing public service processes to hide, control or limit information being made available to Australians. It's very clear. Don't take it from me; that is the prevailing view out there about what is going on right here. There are a couple of lies that Labor keep peddling.”
“If that wasn't enough, the home affairs minister's friend and political supporter Dr Jamal Rifi recently travelled to Syria with 35 passports for ISIS sympathisers seeking to return to Australia. This is a minister who couldn't come clean today in question time. We asked him directly, 'Have you or any of your officials assisted with the repatriation of these ISIS sympathisers with the issuing of passports?' and he said no. Well, I think Peter Jennings, a former public servant, put it best in the Australian newspaper some time ago. He said: Here are five conclusions about the repatriation of the so-called jihadi brides and their children to Australia. First, despite its denials the government is deeply involved. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke leads the process, but several state and federal agencies must be involved. That's point 1.”
“Its fingerprints are all over it, and Labor is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the Australian people. There are only two options for those opposite. Either the government is incompetent and it can't actually deal with these people or the government is lying. They're the two choices: incompetence or lying. Both are bad, and neither position engenders confidence in the Commonwealth government, which is exactly what they should be doing, given that security is the first priority of any Australian government. The Minister for Home Affairs insists that the government is not helping ISIS sympathisers return to Australia. Yet, in September last year, Minister Burke secretly met with Save the Children before they brought six ISIS sympathisers back to Australia.”
“Human surveillance and technical surveillance requires a lot of source development. It requires a lot of operational security. It requires a lot of people in the field keeping Australians safe, and that's just on the intelligence side. We've then got the law enforcement of our police, both federally and across our state jurisdictions. So why would we put additional pressure on already overstretched agencies? I think it's fair enough to ask questions about why the two Bondi shooters were able to slip the net of our police forces—New South Wales, the AFP and also ASIO—and I'm sure the royal commission will deal with that. But let's turn to Labor. The Albanese government denies any role in the return of ISIS sympathisers despite mounting evidence of its assistance.”
“In fact, for all we know, they still hold them. So why would we want to welcome them back into our community and have them celebrated by certain parts of the Australian community? They chose to travel to Iraq and Syria, they chose to remain there, and I think it's right and proper that we go through a very orderly process. But our starting position is that, if you betray this country, you're not welcome back. It's as simple as that. We are going to close the door on these people. I've made it very clear that we don't support the return of ISIS sympathisers to Australia. We know that radicalisation is still occurring, as we saw with the Bondi shooters. ASIO already has 18,000 people on its watchlist. That is very, very intensive work for an organisation that's already overstretched.”
“It wanted to provoke Western democracies like Australia. It wanted to outcompete al-Qaeda, and it wanted to win the hearts and minds of young men and women across the world. That's why we saw so many people from the UK, France, the Philippines and Australia head all the way to Iraq and Syria and join the caliphate. Who can forget Jihadi John—complete with a British accent—who symbolised the international outreach of the caliphate? It was a reach that extended all the way to our shores. Why on earth is this government allowing the repatriation of people who threw in their lot with ISIS? People like to call them ISIS brides, but these are people who are deeply sympathetic to a very systemic system of beliefs that put violence at the very centre of their world view, and we've seen no evidence that these people have repudiated these beliefs.”
“Religious and ethnic minorities all suffered under the yoke of ISIS, and ISIS stoned, beheaded and burnt alive their victims and put it on the internet—glorifying the murders of countless Assyrians, Chaldeans and Yazidis. We welcomed some Yazidis yesterday from the member for Riverina's community. Christians and Jews were also targeted by ISIS. In fact, there are some images that have stuck in our minds. In 2014, journalist James Foley was dragged into the desert and beheaded in broad daylight for all to see. In 2015, a Jordanian F-16 pilot was shot down. Muadh al-Kasasbeh was burnt alive. He was captured, put in a cage in an orange jumpsuit and doused in petrol, and then they lit him on fire in high definition and put it all over the internet. Why did they do this? ISIS wanted to recruit and intimidate.”
“Instead of using their powers and working with us—as we're willing to do; we tried to introduce a private member's bill today that would prevent these people from returning to our shores—Labor are providing assistance for individuals with links to ISIS to return to Australia, and it's extraordinary. Labor is allowing ISIS sympathisers back into the Australian community, even after Bondi. If the average Australian understands the threat that ISIS poses, why can't those opposite? It's very, very clear. You don't have to be a parliamentarian to see the threat that they pose. To remind the Australian public what ISIS were responsible for about 10 years ago, they were responsible for some of the worst atrocities committed in this century: rape, enslavement, torture and murder all across the Middle East and Africa.”
“The coalition will not allow militant political Islam to grow in our communities. We care about our social cohesion, particularly after Bondi, and that's why we strongly oppose the return of ISIS sympathisers to Australia. We only have to look back at the events on 14 December to see what happens when militant political Islam is allowed to fester in our communities, and the result was the cold blooded murder of 15 people at Bondi Beach in an ISIS inspired attack. One of the shooters was actually Australian. He was born here, raised here, schooled here and radicalised here. Despite the horrific attack on Australian soil three months ago, the Albanese government is still allowing the return of ISIS sympathisers to our shores.”
“As the Prime Minister ended question time just then, he made light of our line of questioning today, suggesting that we should be focused on the economy. But there is nothing more important than ensuring the national security of the Australian people and protecting our way of life. Our freedom, security and prosperity should be our top priority. The Liberal and National parties will always put the Australian people first. The government should too. But, under this Albanese Labor government, what we're actually seeing is the complete opposite. The Prime Minister is allowing self-managed returns to Australia for cohorts of ISIS sympathisers. These are women and children of men who went to the Middle East to fight for Islamic State, the world's most dangerous terrorist group this century.”
“My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. It follows the Prime Minister's earlier refusal to answer the question. Can the minister confirm that none of his staff or departmental officials made representations to any relevant departments or agencies to support or expedite the issuing of Australian passports to ISIS sympathisers in Syria?”
“My question is to the Prime Minister. Given the war in the Middle East, and the suspension of air travel following the air strikes on Iran, has the government halted its plan to bring home ISIS sympathisers, and will the government now prioritise bringing home law-abiding Australian citizens at risk from the conflict?”
“My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. I refer to notes taken by the Secretary to the Department of Home Affairs during a meeting she and the minister had with Save the Children about repatriating ISIS sympathisers—before the last election—that were provided to the Senate. These notes have a reference that 'TB stated a commitment to find a way'. What exactly was the commitment the minister made to Save the Children at this meeting?”
“So why would the Albanese government allow the return of ISIS sympathisers to our shores? If the average Australian can see the threat that ISIS poses, why can't this Labor government see the same thing? The Albanese government denies any role in the return of ISIS sympathisers despite mounting evidence of its assistance. But the truth is that the Albanese government is either incompetent or lying. Either way, on this side of the House, we say to ISIS sympathisers there is no room for you in Australia. We do not want traitors living amongst us, and we will do everything in our power to close the door on you, because the Australian people and their way of life always come first.”
“We will always protect the Australian way of life. Protecting our freedom, security and prosperity requires leadership and vigilance, especially after the Bondi Beach terror attack. We can't allow militant political Islam to grow in our communities. That's why we oppose the return of ISIS sympathisers to Australia. This is our home, and we don't want traitors living amongst us. ISIS was responsible for some of the worst atrocities committed this century: rape, enslavement, torture and murder right across the Middle East and Africa. Religious and ethnic minorities suffered under the yoke of ISIS. Who can forget the 21 brave Egyptian Christians who were beheaded on a Libyan beach in 2015 in the name of militant political Islam? Let us not forget that it was ISIS who inspired the Bondi Beach massacre.”
“A member from the Royal New South Wales Lancers in Sydney spoke of their shock at learning their barracks may be sold and the heartbreak of knowing he may never again parade there, where generations stood before him. He sees this as severing our generation from the Anzacs who went before them. And it's not just barracks. A community member from the Western Australian south-west has pointed out that the Coolilup Rifle Range has been listed as having no occupants, which is simply false. It's active most weekends, home to hundreds of members and used by the Army. These aren't abstract concerns. This fire sale is going to destroy morale and it's going to sever the ADF from its culture and tradition.”
“He says those experiences bind families to service. They build pride, tradition and continuity. Once a site like Victoria Barracks is sold, those things cannot be replaced. A long-serving ADF member has described Victoria Barracks, Sydney, as the 'jewel in the crown' of Army heritage, the ceremonial gateway where we welcome dignitaries. It's the home of so much of our Army's tradition. Selling this national site to private developers risks stripping away the army's identity. Another serving member described the pride of working in a place where Australians have served for nearly two centuries. I don't want to give away their identity, but they took a lot of pride in the buildings, the history, the memorabilia and the culture that engenders. I get a very strong sentiment from that communication.”
“Irwin is not derelict land waiting for the next housing development; it is home to WA's Army presence. It houses a major headquarters and supports a wide range of capability, and its role matters even more because Western Australia does not have regular battalions like other states. For reservists, Irwin isn't just a workplace; it's where army readiness is built. And that same reservist points out something else: Irwin has received upgrades in recent years. Defence itself has been investing there, so why are we now being told it's disposable? A former officer commissioned at Fitzroy Barracks has spoken about what it meant to stand on the same ground as generations before him with his family there as they were welcomed into the mess and shown the history by those who understand what the barracks represents.”
“Today, I rise to speak as a voice of those who have served and the communities who stand behind them, because right now, across Australia, Defence sites are being labelled by the Albanese government as underutilised, unsustainable or even vacant land. Under the Albanese government, we're going to see a massive fire sale of very historic and important Defence land and property, and I think that's a very short-sighted and foolish decision. But the people who wear the uniform and the people who support them deserve a voice. I've had plenty of feedback from them, and so today I'm going to give them a voice in this chamber and express some of their views whilst protecting their identities. A reservist in Western Australia has told us plainly that the public narrative about Irwin Barracks is wrong.”
“As our ADF personnel move with a bias for action, I hope that, once this bill is passed, the government will move for a bias for action as well and look after our veterans and their families.”
“I think earlier reporting ensures that veterans, families and parliament can see measurable progress, and it falls in line with our overall objective, which is that the reforms recommended by the royal commission be implemented quickly and assessed openly. I think transparency is absolutely critical here. In the end, what we care about is our servicemen and servicewomen and their families being cared for. They have to respond quickly when their nation calls. I know many have leave disrupted, particularly over Christmas, whether it's to deploy overseas or indeed to respond to natural disasters. They drop everything for our country. I think it's important that we get on with the job of getting this review done.”
“I think it's fair to say that where we land today is bipartisan, but it hasn't been perfect. But we're here, and I think we've come together for veterans and their families, and that's an important message they need to hear from this House. The coalition will be moving an amendment to bring forward the timing of the first implementation review by the commissioner. As currently drafted, the first assessment is not required to be completed until December 2027. We think that's too slow. It's much too slow. We want to bring that back by 15 months, and our amendment would require the first implementation assessment to be completed by no later than 30 September of this year, 2026. I think that's more than sufficient time to assess whether early-stage reforms are being delivered.”
“That bill proposed an independent statutory oversight body with the same structural features now being implemented. I want to note in the House that Labor opposed that legislation at the time for political purposes, and, as a result, the establishment of an independent statutory oversight body was delayed. The structure that Labor is now implementing closely mirrors what we proposed back in government. If the coalition's national commissioner model had been supported instead of being opposed by Labor, independent oversight would already be underway. The coalition will support this framework now, because veterans and families cannot afford further delay, but I think it's important that that history should be acknowledged, particularly in the veteran community. Veteran care should not be a political issue.”
“So we moved an amendment to ensure a dedicated Senate inquiry could provide proper scrutiny of the commission model, and that inquiry confirmed widespread stakeholder concern about independence, about its structure, about its powers, about family inclusion and about clarity of remit. This bill is now stronger because of the contributions of those individuals and ex-service organisations, and I want to thank every single person and organisation that took the time to make a submission or to appear before the royal commission and enhance this policy, which is now going to be enacted through this bill. I also want to make the point here that this is not a new idea from Labor. The coalition introduced legislation to establish an independent National Commissioner for Defence and Veteran Suicide Prevention back in 2020, more than five years ago.”
“Establishing the commission through standalone legislation is what the coalition has argued for for a long time. It's what we've argued for from the beginning. The government's original attempt to create the commission through a late amendment to unrelated legislation was rushed and lacked proper consultation. The coalition supported the amended VETS bill to avoid delaying compensation and rehabilitation reforms for veterans, but not because we supported the government's process or the structure. We supported it because we always put veterans first and we saw the need for urgency and the need to get things done. That's why we supported it. We also made it clear at the time that the commission should be established through standalone legislation, separate from Defence and DVA, with stronger independent guarantees.”
“So I got a sense of what many veterans go through when they encounter DVA. The royal commission confirmed what families and the veteran community had been saying, and that is that systemic failure requires reform. Everyone here in this House, on both sides, is committed to reform. One of the most significant recommendations was the creation of a permanent, independent statutory oversight body to drive reform and to measure progress. These bills are intended to give effect to that recommendation, and the coalition supports that objective. I support that objective, as a veteran. Independent oversight with real powers, public reporting and parliamentary accountability is essential. I believe in our institutions. I believe in accountability, and nowhere is that more important than in the veteran space.”
“It's not something that we can just forget about; we have to constantly revisit it as we move forward into the future and as we reconcile with the wars that we've just fought, particularly in the last decade in Afghanistan. I think it's important to say that things haven't been done well over the last 20 years or so, and that's why the coalition established the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, because veterans and their families deserve truth and accountability. Confidence in the system had broken down. I know this myself, being a veteran and having had to work through my own claim through DVA. I remember testing the system more than five years ago in the minister's office, starting my process there, and it took about four years before it was completed.”
“How a nation cares for its veterans and their families is an insight into the character of that nation. As we reflect on the last 120 years, where Australians have gone to distant shores to defend Australia and its interests, we note that more than 100,000 Australians have given their lives wearing our uniform and serving our country. It's right that we remember and honour those people on Remembrance Day and on Anzac Day. I know many Australians have a lot of pride in our Defence Force and in our veterans, and it's always great to see such big turnouts on those two days. But it's also important that government does its job and looks after veterans and their families, and that process is one that requires constant reform.”
“I think that's why I will miss Luch. I think he was the best of the Australian people. Everyone in this House will be the poorer for his absence but none more so than his family—his wife, Mary, and his children, Jess, Rebecca and Josh. I offer my condolences to them today.”
“I think everyone who works in politics, but particularly in Parliament House, has to have good people skills. But for Luch, it wasn't just a vocation; it was who he was. He was a friendly, cheerful man. Luch transcended his vocation in that sense, which explains why we all had such great affection for him. Our political life is full of peaks and troughs, summits and valleys, and no matter where we might find ourselves on a particular day, Luch always graced the moment with a warm smile and greeting, and that is the memory I have. He had the common touch and he also reminded us of the outside world, the regular Australians who we represent in the chamber. He reminded me not to take things too seriously and not to take things too personally, which I think is really important, and that there is life outside of this building.”
“Today I rise to honour the memory of Luch Jonceski, a servant of this parliament for four decades, who served as an attendant in this House of Representatives and as an assistant to the Speaker of the House. It's a privilege to join with my colleagues in honouring his memory in front of some of his colleagues. Luch was a man who straddled history in the sense that he served both in the old and this present parliament. That's quite an achievement. I only knew Luch for just over a decade, and most of our interactions occurred in the House or in the courtyard outside, where we'd chat away in the sunshine during short breaks. I think that's an experience that many colleagues had. The thing I want to note about Luch today is that he was a consistently cheerful and friendly man. That's how I'll remember Luch.”
“He got up, ran two kilometres for help and set in motion the rescue that saved his mum, his brother and his sister. What Austin did was incredible, and that's why I'm honouring him here today in this House. His actions were brave and they were selfless. Austin showed a quiet heroism that reminds us of previous generations of Australians who have stood up during wars, natural disasters and other national trials. Austin saved his family, but he also showed us that Aussie kids have what it takes in a crisis. I believe in our Aussie kids, their potential and their ticker, and that's why I have hope in Australia's future.”
“Today I want to honour a young man who put his life on the line for his family. Our story begins on the WA south coast last month, where a family holiday became a life-or-death emergency. A mum and her kids were out on the water kayaking on a beautiful summer's day in Geographe Bay. And then the wind came up, the sea turned, and they were pulled out to the deep. Very quickly they were stranded, exhausted and afraid, and the clock was ticking. That's when 13-year-old Austin Appelbee was asked by his mother to do something extraordinary. She asked Austin to swim for shore and get help. And swim he did for four kilometres through open and unforgiving ocean. His mission was very simple: to save his family. Now, Austin didn't panic. He took on the job and just kept swimming. And, when he finally hit the beach, he kept moving.”